www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy RDL Poses a musical conundrum

I'm a choir director at a Byzantine Catholic church. The RDL now poses a very real problem for me. I have
tons of music in English, but the RDL is copyrigthed. I can't legally change my music to match the new texts.
As I see it, I have three alternatives:

1. Continue using the current music, text won't match.
2. Sing everything in Church Slavonic.
3. Disband the choir.

I will not risk infringing on copyright; don't need to be made an "example of" for such a horrible translation.
I will not use 4-part music published by the MCI as most people in the parish are comfortable with what we currently have. Does anyone have any other PRACTICAL suggestions?

John Scotus

I haven't thought it all the way through yet but my immediate response is that I'd be happy with singing all the revised text in Slavonic.

Your note made my day

Mary

The topic of copyright church music is an interesting issue.

I've read a number of posts on these forums and i believe the Ruthenians based their 'copyrighted' melodies on melodies published long ago that had no copyright protection and that these melodies were based on how the 'people' sang in their worship. So, it would seem that musicians today are taking public music and locking in the melodies with copyright protection. Obvioiusly the hymns, melodies, and various styles are no longer going to belong to the people. Is this incorrect?

Will anyone be sued or sent to jail if the copyright music is used as a basis for choral hymns? Copyrighted material is legally protected. ask what kind of action your church will actually take against its people for new melodies 'based on' melodies that the copyrighted melodies were based on.

somwhere I read that icons. which are typical and representative of byzcath and orthodox Christianity are not normally signed. i always thought this was interesting. no authorship. why? I note the great and famous Rublev's three angels icon which many think to represent the Trinity. it wasn't signed. The issue of authorship (to which modern-day copyright protection offers lega recourse) and ownership can benefit here for reflection.

Who was the author of the byzcath melodies?

Who owns the music?

Who can claim authorship of these melodes today?

Who can claim ownership of these melodes today?

Can the text of the hymn enjoy copyright protection wherease the melody not?

Our congregation had to establish copyright permission to copy music to use at worship. Church music is a big business industry. Is this the same in the byzcath andrelated churches?

Eddie Hashinsky

I didn't know the RDL was mandated in the land of Erin as well.

Otche nash
izhe esi na nebesakh,
da svjatitsja imja Tvoe,
da pridet carstvie Tvoe,
da bud'et volja Tvoja
jako na nebesi i na zemli.
Khleb nash nasushtnij dazhd nam dnes,
i ostavi nam dolgi nasha,
jako zhe i mi ostavljaem dolzhnikom nashim.
i ne vovedi nas vo izkushenie,
no izbavi nas ot lukavago.
Amin.

The Lords prayer in Slavonic.

Wondering comments that:


It most certainly is not! Here in Ireland we serve the complete Divine Liturgy, thank you very much.

Fr. Serge

Christ is risen!

The 1965 "Divine Liturgy of Our Father Saint John Chysostom" - the old "gray booklet" or "brown booklet", depending on which printing - was similarly "(c) 1965 by Byzantine Liturgical Conference", and in 40 years I have never heard of anyone running into problems setting those texts to other music. Various Orthodox prayer books and service books have the same sort of "All rights reserved" notice.

The Metropolitan Cantor Institute 4-part settings in preparation are no more "official" than any one else's, since there IS no source of an canonical harmony. What you want to do is being done by quite a number of others within the Metropolia already. Since you are worried about potential problems, and since the copyright notice in the Green Book says exactly whom to contact for copying permission, why don't you contact your Chancery, ask if they have any problem with your setting the texts to music, and let us know what answer you receive?

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

John,

it's good to see you post again.

Doesn't Archbishop Basil's promulgation letter preclude #1 and #2 since the letter states that the new books are the only texts and music allowed? (I'm paraphrasing)

Of the choices you gave, only #3, disbanding the choir, is possible according to the promulgation letter.

Of course another option is to sing the new translation and music but I really can't blame you for leaving that out.


I personally like #2, sing everything in Slavonic. The horrible and feminist translations go away. The best would be if the priests started taking the final dismissal in Slavonic so I wouldn't have to hear " and he loves us all" or if they would take the part at the conclusion of the Great Entrance in Slavonic we would here 'Pravoslavny Christiany' instead of 'Christians of the True Faith.'

The Creed would be another one that Slavonic would help with.


But this is just day dreaming and once again, according to the promulgation letter not an option.

Finally, whether we sing in Slavonic or Swahili, it doesn't correct the absence of the little litanies or the presence of one verse antiphons, etc.

The REAL option would be to have this unfortunate RDL go away and get our churches to do a full Liturgy with a non-feminized translation, preceded by Matins, preceded by Vespers the night before. Oops, I'm daydreaming again.

Monomakh

Do you have any experience Jeff that would give some indication of what the response might be?

Mary

No, that's why I'm asking the OP. The point of preparing the new service books is that they be used - unlike the 1965 books, which were apparently intended to be used *in part*. There is no requirement that ONLY the new music be used; rather, there seems to be a desire on the hierarchs' part that the music be AVAILABLE for use, since so many cantors and faithful have complained over the years (I've heard a lot!) that there was NO MUSIC in the books, and that parish singing, especially when led by untrained or undertrained cantors, diverged very widely, to the detriment of our worship.

Now, choirs need more music than the Music Commission is going to produce. (The bishops COULD certainly have ordered that ONLY the new music be used, and thereby suppressed choral singing - they didn't.) In Pittsburgh and other places, choral settings based on the new texts are in use; more are being prepared by cantors and choir directors across the Metropolia. So I have to conclude that if the bishops have NOT chosen to suppress choral singing, and they have ORDERED the new text to be used, that one prepares choral music using the new texts.

As I mentioned before, our translations have ALWAYS been printed under copyright; there is nothing new with the new texts. If one is preparing music for non-commercial use BY our people IN church, it seems senseless to predict some kind of new episcopal restrictions on the use of the texts they have ordered to be used.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

This is exceptionally helpful, Jeff. I think it is well worth following up.

Thanks,

Mary

Jeff,

Christos Voskrese!

I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe. Because what you and many who support the revision continue to tell us is that choral arrangements are allowed, slavonic is allowed, copyrights are a non-issue, etc. in spite of clear and concise words coming from our Bishops that are in direct contrast to these claims.

In the front of the new pew book the bishops are very clear:


The names of the four bishops are listed right below it.


No other books or musical settings are allowed. Where do you see an allowance for allowing the use of either choral music or Slavonic?

Archbishop Basil�s Letter of Promulgation says the same thing in different words.


Bishop John also sent an official letter to his clergy that included:




Professor Thompson has even told us on this board:

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbt...n&topic=0&Search=true#Post222565


The bishops have forbidden the use of any other musical settings, including all choral settings. This applies to Slavonic and English. I've been told by cantors in Parma that Bishop John has been asked about this by more than a few priests and said that any cantor or choirmaster who wishes to use music not in the official publications needs to write to Archbishop Basil and request permission. They must receive written permission before they can use it. Some cantors in Passiac that I know have told me that Bishop Pataki has told cantors who have complained about the new music that that is the way it is.


Jeff,

I think that some of this could be all cleared up easily. Could you provide a copy of the authorization letter from Archbishop Basil for the choral music and/or Slavonic together with a list of parishes that have successfully implemented these new choral settings?

I hope this will help me out of this parallel universe.

I'll await your reply.

Monomakh

I was under the impression, based on statements by Archbishop Basil, Prof. Thompson and numerous others, that the promulgation of the text in the RDL applies only to "English" liturgies. And that there has been no banning of Church Slavonic.

I agree. If the promulgation really means that this music, and only this music may be used, I'll turn in my baton. I'm glad to use the new music, but no choir is going to be satisfied with foregoing Bortniansky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Kedroff, etc.

Jeff, since you are in the know, could you just pick up the phone and ask? If, for example, my choir were going to sing a liturgy, using the new music (as we have been doing), but choosing to sing the Kedroff Our Father, would we have to write a letter to Bishop Basil first? Would I need to write a separate letter for each item in the repertoire? Would I need to send him a copy of the choir book?

I don't think I could be bothered with all that. I'd rather quit.